SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1962 Supreme(AP) 132

JAGMOHAN REDDY, NARASIMHAM, P.CHANDRA REDDY
Cheladma Venkata Ram Rao – Appellant
Versus
Engu Narayana – Respondent


REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THE following question has been referred to the Full Bench by our learned brothers Manohar Pershad and Munikannaiah, JJ. : "has the appellate Court power to proceed with the hearing of the appeal and to reverse and vary the decree in favour of all the plaintiffs or defendants under Order 22 Rule 3 and Order 41, Rule 4 C. P. C. it all the plaintiffs or defendants appeal from the decree and one of them dies and no substitution is effected within time always assuming that the decree proceeds on a ground common to all the plaintiffs or defendants".

( 2 ) THE aforesaid question appears to have arisen in the following circumstances: The petitioner in C. M. Ps. 6368 and 6369/60 filed a suit against five defendants for a declaration of his title to the suit properties as pattedar and for recovery of possession thereof. The trial Court decreed the suit, and against the judgment and decree the defendants filed A. S. No. 24/1 of 1954-55. After the appeal was filed in the High Court and during its pendency, the decree-holder took out execution proceedings for possession. Against this. order also the judgment-debtors filed an appeal, being A. A. O. 127/1 of 1954-55. This appeal

























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top